LAS VEGAS (Legal Newsline) - Medical-malpractice lawyers can't rely on the testimony of a nurse when arguing doctors failed their client, the Nevada Supreme Court has ruled.
The court on July 6 ruled against David Monk, acting as the administrator of the Estate of Sharon Monk, in his effort to sue three doctors over an infection in Sharon's tongue. The court did not address whether a nurse could ever opine on treatment by doctors, concluding first that this particular nurse failed to support the claim of medical malpractice in this specific case.
"(T)his case does not require us to go so far," it said. "Even when read in conjunction with the complaint, the Hambrick declaration does not sufficiently specify the acts of negligence as to each (doctor), or express an opinion as to the medical standard of care the (doctor) breached."
Doctors at University Medical Center removed a malignant tumor at the base of her tongue but an infection followed. They performed a skin graft, but the infection worsened and the wound was packed with gauze.
Sharon continued to feel pain ad suffer infections and it was discovered that the gauze had not been removed entirely prior to the placement of a wound vac. She passed away months after the gauze was removed.
David sought to sue three doctors and UMC and, pursuant to requirements for medical malpractice lawsuits, attached an affidavit that alleged the doctors had breached their standard of care.
But lawyers chose a nurse, Jamescia Hambrick, to submit the affidavit. The doctors successfully argued in a Clark County trial court that a nurse was not capable of testifying to a doctor's standard of care.
The Supreme Court agreed, dismissing the case, despite Hambrick's experience in wound care and post-operative treatment.
"Neither Nurse Hambrick's declaration nor the complaint adequately identifies the specific roles payed by each individual (doctor)," the opinion says. "And notably absent from Nurse Hambrick's declaration are the relevant standards of care or any opinion as to how, or even whether, each (doctor) breached that standard to a reasonable degree of medical probability."
And an adequate affidavit was required, even though the gauze was left during a procedure other than surgery, it ruled.